CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › The Greatest Miscasting Mishaps In History
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Greatest Miscasting Mishaps In History

post #1 of 145
Thread Starter 

GO!

 

images.jpg

post #2 of 145

I'm not sure if I brought my own preconceptions in but I always felt that Matthew Goode was too sinister a figure in the Watchmen movie. Whilst I wouldn't have called it miscasting I think the role of Veidt would have been better served by a more traditional hero figure than Goode, who just emenated suspicion from his first speech.

 

Goode is a fantastic actor, he's great in Cemetery Junction and A Single Man, but not the right man for the job. In my view.

post #3 of 145
Thread Starter 

I think he was misdirected more than miscast. He absolutely could have pulled off Veidt, but giving him a Germanic accent? Unbelievable. In hindsight, Tom Hardy would've smacked that role out of the park.

post #4 of 145
post #5 of 145

I think a lot of his casting had to do with his last scenes. A more traditionally heroic actor would never have nailed the mix of relief and melancholy after "I did it 35 minutes ago".

 

Malin Akerman's the far greater crime for that flick.

 

On a related note, Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane belongs here like a motherfucker. Just brings NOTHING to that role.

post #6 of 145

Paul Walker. As a goddamned human being.

 

Seen "Eight Below"? He sees a leopard seal and says, "More leopard than seal, I say." The way he says that... come on, dude, you're not fooling us. You're clearly not human.

post #7 of 145
Thread Starter 
Quote:


Madness! Cera aces that part.

post #8 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Clark View Post

I think a lot of his casting had to do with his last scenes. A more traditionally heroic actor would never have nailed the mix of relief and melancholy after "I did it 35 minutes ago".


This I will agree with, and how Goode plays those last twenty minutes is one of the reasons I still have a lot of respect, if not love, for WATCHMEN. I just wish they'd reigned in his impulses a little, or allowed him to be charming or fun or anything other than the purple wearing, possibly gay*, Aryan overlord.

 

*This is meant with no intended homophobia on my part, although I suspect there's a little on Snyder's part.

 

ETA: Agree with Andrew. Cera is amazing in that film, the only person who upstages him is Kieran Culkin who is just flat out brilliant. In fact I think Scott Pilgrim is one of the best cast films of last year.

 

post #9 of 145

2Q==

post #10 of 145

Sofia Coppola in Godfather 3 is an obvious one, although I'm not convinced that Winona Ryder would have been great in that role, either.

 

 

post #11 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post

 

ETA: Agree with Andrew. Cera is amazing in that film, the only person who upstages him is Kieran Culkin who is just flat out brilliant. In fact I think Scott Pilgrim is one of the best cast films of last year.

 


It's well cast outside of the lead, who is a vaccum in the role.
 

 

post #12 of 145

Speaking of Coppola, Keanu in Dracula.  I actually think he has a good screen presence, but he really can't handle the English accent.

post #13 of 145



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather View Post

I think he was misdirected more than miscast. He absolutely could have pulled off Veidt, but giving him a Germanic accent? Unbelievable. In hindsight, Tom Hardy would've smacked that role out of the park.



 I'm going to be that guy. The accent is from the novel. In one of his interviews the author notes that Veidt speaks with his natural German accent in private but adopts an American accent when speaking publicly. Goode does this in the film and not to derail but Veidt's character was done no service at all, from the script up.

I always get a clip round the ear for this but Tom Cruise would have owned Veidt.

 

In other news...

 

keanu-reeves-dracula.jpg

 

ETA HtP beat me to it!


Edited by Mike's Pants - 9/13/11 at 6:31am
post #14 of 145
post #15 of 145

It's been FOUR YEARS, let it go man.

post #16 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangy View Post

Sofia Coppola in Godfather 3 is an obvious one, although I'm not convinced that Winona Ryder would have been great in that role, either.

 

 



No no, obvious isn't bad. It truly cannot be stressed enough how much Mary Corleone wins this thread.

post #17 of 145

Kind of a behind the scenes one, but I'm kind of intrigued about how much of an insane, uproariously drunk, asshole James Remar had to be to get Cameron to replace him during shooting. They allude to it a little in the three hour documentary, but I've always been fascinated by what would make a control-freak like Cameron just say "fuck it, replace him" a quarter of the way through a shoot.

post #18 of 145

What movie is this?

post #19 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evi View Post

What movie is this?


Shit, sorry. It's ALIENS. Remar was initially Hicks, and they shot for about a week or two with him and then had to bring Biehn in as a replacement because he was such an drunken asshole. Apparently they reshot most of the stuff apart from one sequence in a set they had demolished.

 

post #20 of 145

Was it Aliens?

post #21 of 145

Seeing Remar in Walter Hill, Coppola and Friedkin films, I'm going to say Cameron must be kind of a little bitch that he can't handle James Remar.

post #22 of 145

It's one of those facts that has stuck with me largely because of Michael Biehn's smirk when he's telling the story. If the Alien documentaries taught me anything, it's that Michael Biehn is actually kind of asshole, but an awesome asshole.

post #23 of 145


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike's Pants View Post

 

I always get a clip round the ear for this but Tom Cruise would have owned Veidt.

 



No clips are coming. I thought this the minute I put the book down the first time. Only problem is the rest of the film would've needed that level of star power to make Veidt's turn less obvious. That probably would've gotten us Keanu as Dr. Manhattan as God intended, but still.

post #24 of 145

Kirsten Dunst in Elizabethtown. She feels out of place in most things--Interview With The Vampire, Eternal Sunshine, and (if the hype's to be believed) Melancholia aside--but not for one second do I buy her in this film, and Bloom's character, especially the ending, hinges on her.

post #25 of 145

I have to go with Leonardo DiCaprio and Cameron Diaz in Gangs of New York.  This is not to say that Leo is not a really good actor, but he was a bit out of his depth here.  He couldn't quite nail the accent, and he's just completely outshone by Daniel Day Lewis (which, really, I don't hold against him, because lots of people have that problem).  He and Diaz just feel really out of place in this film, and feel more like stunt casting in order to bring the kids and the ladies to what is ultimately kind of a weird, epic drama/action film.  Plus, there is just no chemistry between them, and the love story really suffers for it.  I still love the movie, but wish that we had gotten more convincing leads.

post #26 of 145
Thread Starter 

Colin Farrell would've rocked out with his cock out as Amsterdam in GANGS. Diaz's role should've just been axed.

post #27 of 145

Mark Patton as Jesse in A Nightmare on Elm Street: Part 2.

 

Now I'm of the opinion that the film would be better served told from the point of view of Lisa rather than Jesse, but Patton brings an energy to his performance which when combined with other facets of the film kind of makes everything hyper-gay. Now that's not a problem in of itself, apart from the fact that it colours practically everything about the film. Patton himself is an odd presence in the film anyways, and just makes Jesse come across as kind of weird at times. In terms of actors in Slasher films it's a little unfair to single out Patton, but he's definitely the worst lead in the Nightmare series.

 

 

post #28 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather View Post

Colin Farrell would've rocked out with his cock out as Amsterdam in GANGS. Diaz's role should've just been axed.



Where were you when they were casting that damn film?!

post #29 of 145

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Clark View Post


 

No clips are coming. I thought this the minute I put the book down the first time. Only problem is the rest of the film would've needed that level of star power to make Veidt's turn less obvious. That probably would've gotten us Keanu as Dr. Manhattan as God intended, but still.


True dat! And the marketing campaign would have been a little different...
 

 

post #30 of 145

DiCaprio is like bullet-dodging Neo of this thread. He's such a babyface, even in his 30s, and always has such a teenager's presence in scattered moments, but no matter how wrong he seems for the role, he nails that shit. And far as Gang of New York goes, he's fine, even if, yeah, his accent's iffy, and DDL just hijacks that film from under him any and every chance he gets.

 

Cameron Diaz, completely agreed, though.

post #31 of 145
Thread Starter 

Cruise saying "I did it thirty-five minutes ago" in his smug Vincent-from-COLLATERAL voice would be better than anything in Snyder's version.

post #32 of 145

Bruce Willis as Peter mother fucking Fallow. What De Palma was thinking I'll never know.

post #33 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post

Mark Patton as Jesse in A Nightmare on Elm Street: Part 2.

 

Now I'm of the opinion that the film would be better served told from the point of view of Lisa rather than Jesse, but Patton brings an energy to his performance which when combined with other facets of the film kind of makes everything hyper-gay. Now that's not a problem in of itself, apart from the fact that it colours practically everything about the film. Patton himself is an odd presence in the film anyways, and just makes Jesse come across as kind of weird at times. In terms of actors in Slasher films it's a little unfair to single out Patton, but he's definitely the worst lead in the Nightmare series.

 

 


That character is a closet case from the script page on. The particular actor who plays the dream sequence where his gym teacher is whipped in a shower after picking him up in a leather bar isn't what makes that hyper gay. You could put the straightest straight guy ever in there and it's still really, really gay,

 

post #34 of 145

Mark Patton is hugely problematic in the role.  Sure, we're not looking for depths of realism in a Nightmare sequel, but he also comes off as fundamentally weird and, frankly, unlikeable.  It's almost impossible to believe that he could be friends with an (ostensibly) cool kid like Grady or date a girl like Lisa (or, y'know, date a girl period *ahem*).  Hell, the gay energy he brings to the role, as well as the least subtextiest subtext ever, is actually the film's saving grace.

post #35 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Clark View Post

Kirsten Dunst in Elizabethtown. She feels out of place in most things--Interview With The Vampire, Eternal Sunshine, and (if the hype's to be believed) Melancholia aside--but not for one second do I buy her in this film, and Bloom's character, especially the ending, hinges on her.



I'd like to know just what Kirsten Dunst did to internet dudes that make them dislike her so. She's a good actress, she's ALWAYS been a good actress, and she is good in all of the films you mention above. I get it that she wasn't what we all pictured MJ from the comics to be, but she did what she was asked to do in the Spider-Man films. I just don't get why people dislike her. Plus, she's extremely cute, I don't care what anyone says. And i don't think she was miscast in ELIZABETHTOWN -- the movie is a mess with or without her.

 

Now Orlando Bloom, that guys sucks and has always sucked. hes OK as Legolas though.

post #36 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil View Post




That character is a closet case from the script page on. The particular actor who plays the dream sequence where his gym teacher is whipped in a shower after picking him up in a leather bar isn't what makes that hyper gay. You could put the straightest straight guy ever in there and it's still really, really gay,

 


I think there is a subtext to the film, especially with Freddy as a primal, uncontrollable force, welling up within Jesse, but I think Patton and the way he literally flounces through the role makes it text. Plus as Mattioli points out the kid is just unlikeable, you watch his interactions with other people and you really don't get how he is possibly friends with these people. As the films go on the characters become more and more cipher like, but Nightmare 2 is practically a character study and as such having a character like Jesse is problematic.

 

post #37 of 145

I like Brad Pitt a lot, but guy is not great in Troy. Casting someone of his looks and caliber works on the page, but something about it isn't right, especially considering that he's blown off the screen by Eric Bana.

 

Orlando Bloom in Troy is more obvious but  the guy's been a weak link in most of his films, particularly Kingdom of Heaven, which was a casting fuckup of note - though I have heard the DC fixes it somewhat.

post #38 of 145

It's such a no-brainer I hesitate to bring it up, but the cringeworthiest miscasting I can recall is Halle Berry as Storm. Not that the film version requires the comic character's regal bearing, but a modicum of  presence might be nice. And she wears the contempt she has for the material on her face the whole movie through.

post #39 of 145

I would be 100% more behind Halle Berry if she didn't bob her head to the side like a confused labrador everytime she was called on to use her powers.

post #40 of 145

Halle Berry and the Case of the Magically Disappearing Accent

post #41 of 145

It probably speaks to my inherent racism, or the dearth of black actresses, but I literally cannot think of any other high-profile black actress who could haved played Storm at the time.

post #42 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Clark View Post

DiCaprio is like bullet-dodging Neo of this thread. He's such a babyface, even in his 30s, and always has such a teenager's presence in scattered moments, but no matter how wrong he seems for the role, he nails that shit. And far as Gang of New York goes, he's fine, even if, yeah, his accent's iffy, and DDL just hijacks that film from under him any and every chance he gets.

 

Cameron Diaz, completely agreed, though.

DDL would've stolen that movie out from under Brando in his prime.  Diaz is awful in it, but there was always going to be issues with the primary "hero" characters being underwritten compared to the villains and supporting cast.
 

 

post #43 of 145
post #44 of 145

For my money, it's hard to beat Orlando Bloom in KINGDOM OF HEAVEN. Everything surrounding his character in that movie was a joy to behold, from the world Scott created with the sets and costumes to the story and cast, and yet there he sat in the center of it all, a black hole of charisma, a yawning maw determined to suck all the air out of the movie. Balian was a character defined by his internalization of grief, and his quiet nature, yet Bloom had nothing going on behind his blank eyes. His performance wasn't just vapid, it was dull, when what was needed was an actor who could smolder in silence, and keep the audiences attention in the midst of all that grand spectacle

I think Bale would have been the best choice, but even Paul Bettany (Scott's first pick) would have been enough to make the film a true classic

Instead it's one of the most unfortunate misfires of the Aughts, because all that brilliance is inescapably hamstrung by the fact the lead was utterly out of his league (I don't loath Bloom, he's fine as an Elf, he's just not a leading man)

And...

I'd have to say that Angelina Jolie as Olympias is by far one of the worst casting mistakes in a big budget film released in my life time. Her absurdly cartoonish portrayal of one of the most important women in history was hard to take seriously on any level. Our introduction to her character starts strong (I enjoy her delivery of the line "In my womb I carried my avenger!"), but by the time Alexander is grown and she's tasked with sharing the screen with Farrell (in what has to be one of the most captivating performances of the century), her acting has inexplicably devolved into camp, and it's hard to take anything she says seriously. While she is not in the film for most of it's 3.45 hour running time, her later scenes are physically painful to watch, and detract from the film. In Stone's film, Alexander's mother is  supposed to cast a long shadow over his life, and greatly impact his psychology even after he leaves for the Asian invasion. Stone posits that this is why he never returned home, and refused to send for her to be brought to Babylon. Unfortunately Jolie does little to adequately establish Olympias as that domineering figure. She becomes Angelina Jolie doing some sort of schick, rather than disappearing into the role. I fear she was cast because she's a 'name', and not because she was the best actress for the part

PS I understand WHY Jack Black was cast in KK, I just don't think he succeeded in the way Jackson had hoped. He was the right type of personality, but perhaps just not a talented enough actor to pull it off

post #45 of 145

Mattioli, how can he be both problematic and the film's saving grace? Unless you mean that it's not that good a movie to begin with (agree). And I guess as such I don't really have a problem with the subtext being text. The shower/gym teacher nightmare alone pushes it all straight into "text" territory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post

It probably speaks to my inherent racism, or the dearth of black actresses, but I literally cannot think of any other high-profile black actress who could haved played Storm at the time.

 

Angela Bassett was a viable (and favored) choice in 2000.
 

 

post #46 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post

It probably speaks to my inherent racism, or the dearth of black actresses, but I literally cannot think of any other high-profile black actress who could haved played Storm at the time.



Angela Bassett. Though the material probably actually was beneath her.

 

ETA: Phil beat me to it.


Edited by bendrix - 9/13/11 at 8:33am
post #47 of 145
Thread Starter 

I'm going to ignore the ALEXANDER fetishizing and just say that I love Jack Black in KONG. Hell, I love all three leads. I just hate all the extraneous crap.

post #48 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike's Pants View Post



 



 I'm going to be that guy. The accent is from the novel. In one of his interviews the author notes that Veidt speaks with his natural German accent in private but adopts an American accent when speaking publicly. Goode does this in the film and not to derail but Veidt's character was done no service at all, from the script up.

I always get a clip round the ear for this but Tom Cruise would have owned Veidt.

 

In other news...

 

keanu-reeves-dracula.jpg

 

ETA HtP beat me to it!


Sadly I fear you're right. While I love FFC's BS's D, the fact of the matter is that a great deal of the tension and drama depends on us buying into the Harker character and his journey, and Keanu never seems comfortable in the role. The wonderfully creepy scenes in the castle are marred by his underwhelming reaction to all the spookiness. His face is an inexpressive mask when some pretty genuinely dastardly stuff is going down right in front of him, and so you're left to wonder: "is  Harker a dolt? Is that why he doesn't realize something evil is afoot?... or is it Keanu that is not able to display those emotions?"

 

When he gets back to London it's even worse, and he just slips into the background, unable to command the screen when stacked against the likes of Hopkins, Oldman.. and even Cary Elwes. I understand that Harker is supposed to be a somewhat pathetic cuckold of a man, but that doesn't mean that he needed to be such a non entity in the movie

 

I like Keanu, I like him alot. He has certain qualities that can bring alot to the right role. Unfortunately his selection as Jonathan Harker is the very definition of "miscasting"

 

PS I like the idea of Tom Cruise as Veidt. I think it would have been pretty great, though I don't think that casting was ever really WATCHMEN's main problem

 

post #49 of 145

Yeah, Black being cast wasn't the problem, it was the forty+ minutes of needless plot mechanics that dragged the movie down.

 

That being said, if Jackson really wanted to make Denham an Orson Welles-type lord whose hubris and greed is his undoing, one has to wonder where Phillip Seymour Hoffman was when the phone rang.

post #50 of 145

I can't agree with Black's casting not being a problem. The guy's simply not a strong actor when he isn't mugging for the camera.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movie Miscellany
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › The Greatest Miscasting Mishaps In History